Daniel Nazer

Daniel Nazer

Daniel is a Senior Staff Attorney on the Electronic Frontier Foundation's intellectual property team, focusing on patent reform. Prior to joining EFF, Daniel was a Residential Fellow at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society. He also practiced at Keker & Van Nest, LLP, where he represented technology clients in patent and antitrust litigation. Before that, Daniel was a legal fellow with the Drug Law Reform Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. Daniel clerked for Justice Susan Kenny of the Federal Court of Australia and Judge William K. Sessions, III of the U.S. District of Vermont. Daniel has a B.A. in Philosophy from the University of Western Australia, an M.A. in philosophy from Rutgers, and a J.D. from Yale Law School.

Daniel is the author of The Tragicomedy of the Surfer’s Commons (9 Deakin L. Rev. 655) and Conflict and Solidarity: The Legacy of Jeff D. (17 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 499). When he is not working, Daniel can be found surfing at San Francisco’s Ocean Beach.

Deeplinks Posts by Daniel

If you’ve ever seen a picture menu, you’ve seen the supposed ‘invention’ claimed by U.S. Patent 6,585,516. Although it had a complex-sounding title (“Method and system for computerized visual behavior analysis, training, and planning”), the patent simply claimed using picture menus on a computer. Patent troll DietGoal Innovations, LLC...

In 2014’s Alice v. CLS Bank, the Supreme Court ruled that an abstract idea does not become eligible for a patent simply by being implemented on a generic computer. Since then, Alice has provided a lifeline for real businesses threatened or sued with bogus patents. This week, on the...

The New York State Legislature is considering a bill that would radically reshape its right of publicity law. Assembly Bill A08155 [PDF] would dramatically expand New York’s right of publicity, making it a property right that can be passed on to your heirs – even if you aren’t a...

Patent litigation abuse thrives when patent trolls can force defendants into making a hard choice: pay the troll (even though the claim is absurd) or pay even more to your lawyers. This week, the Federal Circuit issued an encouraging ruling that will make it harder to use this gambit...

Today the Supreme Court issued a decision that will have a massive impact on patent troll litigation. In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, the court ruled that patent owners can sue corporate defendants only in districts where the defendant is incorporated or has committed acts of infringement and...

Our ongoing Reclaim Invention campaign urges universities not to sell patents to trolls. This month’s stupid patent provides a good example of why. US Patent No. 8,473,532 (the ’532 patent), “Method and apparatus for automatic organization for computer files,” began its life with publicly-funded Louisiana Tech University...

In a ruling today that will cheer up patent trolls, the Supreme Court said patent owners can lie in wait for years before suing. This will allow trolls to sit around while others independently develop and build technology. The troll can then jump out from under the bridge and...

Update: March 1, 2017Today IBM told Ars Technica that it "has decided to dedicate the patent to the public" and it filed a formal disclaimer at the Patent Office making this dedication. While this is just one patent in IBM's massive portfolio, we are glad to...

Xilinx willget to fight patent troll in home court, but many troll targets will still be dragged to distant and inconvenient forums. If a patent troll threatens your company, can you go to your nearest federal court and ask for a ruling that the patent is invalid or that...